Aye. Former Congressman Ron Paul is much more principled and never compromised or played politics. Unfortunately that meant that, had he ever actually become President like we'd always dreamed of, he would've likely been dragged into a cruel battle with the Deep State and face some ruinous fate like a JFK-style assassination. Because of the corruption of the DS, the current office of US Presidency cannot accommodate only the idealism that made Ron Paul popular: he needed teeth, and he lacked it. At the very least with his run, he awakened many to the ideals of freedom, truth-seeking, and upholding the constitution, and many such individuals ultimately helped Trump in his presidency.

Senator Rand Paul, on the other hand, is playing the nastier long game of politics like President Donald Trump has been doing so far. I think he is potentially as principled as his father, but his compromises make him seem like a sell-out no matter the actual long-term strategic value of his moves. His method of spreading the word is subtler, with him engaging more in rhetoric and dialogue rather than Ron Paul's clear-cut "this is how it should be in line with the Constitution" messaging.

With that said, I would actually pick Rand Paul over Ron Paul for the "non-ideal" US Presidency, because he is a shrewder man than Ron Paul with both skin and teeth to survive. (Of course, between the two Pauls and DJT, I would always pick DJT for the real non-ideal presidency, and Ron Paul for the ideal swamp-free presidency). I also suspect that Rand Paul's certification was coordinated in some way with Trump and the white-hats, because of how white-hat-esque his moves other than the certification are, and how potentially necessary the certification might've been for the Plan to run smoothly.